Namrata Tapan Bose vs Sunita Vilas Gaonkar

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Bom) 1035

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Somasekhar Sundaresan
Namrata Tapan Bose – Appellant
Versus
Sunita Vilas Gaonkar – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Nigel Quraishy a/w. Dushyant Krishnan, Snehil Rai and Shruti Dubey, Namrata Tapan Bose and Aniket Bose.
For the Respondent: Dr. Uday Warunjikar a/w. Sumit Kate, Sunita Vilas Gaonkar. Ms. Archana Khan a/w. Suraj S. Iyer, Ms. Nandini Deshpande, 1st Assistant Court Receiver.

Table of Content
1. petition under section 9 of arbitration act regarding partnership dissolution. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 6)
2. arguments presented by the petitioners regarding disenfranchisement and rights. (Para 4 , 11 , 12)
3. court observes ongoing violations of rights despite arbitration award. (Para 5 , 7 , 8)
4. clarification of partnership terms and rights of the bose siblings. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)
5. court orders dissolution of saikrupa and outlines remedial actions. (Para 37 , 39 , 40)

JUDGMENT :

Somasekhar Sundaresan, J.

Context and Background:

1. This is a Petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“the Act”) in connection with the dissolution of a Partnership Deed dated June 14, 2023 (“Partnership Deed”) in relation to a partnership firm called M/s. Saikrupa Medical and General Stores (“Saikrupa”). The firm carries out the activity of running a chemist shop right across one of the busiest public hospitals in Mumbai – the K.E.M. Hospital in Parel.

2. It is the case of the Petitioners Ms. Namrata Tapan Bose and Mr. Aniket Tapan Bose (“Bose Siblings”) that their have rights systematically and consistently been frustrated by the conduct of the Respondents